On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:54:40 -0800, Dave Bugg wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 15:32:41 -0800, Dave Bugg wrote:
>>
>>> Gloria P wrote:
>>>> islation. About damn time.
>>>>>
>>>>> nb
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are yu saying that California DOESN'T need immigrant labor to grow
>>>> and pick fruit, vegetables, and th9ings like wine grapes?
>>>
>>> I think the issue is more of legal migrant labor vs ILLEGAL alien
>>> labor.
>>>
>>>> Believe it or not, many illegals do pay taxes if they work for a
>>>> reputable employer and aren't paid in cash.
>>>
>>> In order to do so, however, illegals have to forge and falsify
>>> documents, which many times involves identity theft.
>>>
>>>> And since they aren't
>>>> legal, they can't claim refunds.
>>>
>>> Which is ok with me. It has been demonstrated that ILLEGAL aliens
>>> (not legal migrant laborers) are a negative drain on social services.
>>
>> i think i would like to see a cite on that. it is widely bandied
>> about, but i don't think it has been demonstrated. cheap labor
>> usually provides benefits to *somebody*.
>
> Feel free to use google. I researched the information a long while ago and
> haven't kept it at my fingertips. The info is valid, but feel free to prove
> it wrong. Keep in mind that much of the accusations surrounding negative
> drain among migrants did not seperate legal vs illegal which is the big
> mistake. I speak only of illegals. As to the benefits of cheap labor, such
> benefit usually stops at the employer and his overhead expenditures.
> Fortunately, that (illegals being employed) has been aggressively pursued
> for the last 18 months. And in the case of the large manufacturers being
> busted, long lines of Americans and legal migrants were lined up to take
> those jobs.
>

The Washington Post, in a June 4, 2007 editorial article titled "Immigrants
Equal Growth... Reform Isn't Just Humane. It's Self-Interest," offered the
following:

"Amid the blizzard of data concerning immigrants' effects on wages,
welfare and municipal budgets, the essential point is this: The latest wave
of immigrants -- legal and illegal, skilled and unskilled -- has stimulated
enormous economic activity and wealth generation in this country, and it is
implausible that the American economy would fare as well without them...

Since most immigrants come when they are young and working... they tend
not to collect Social Security or Medicare for many years -- even while
paying into the systems with payroll taxes, in many cases with phony Social
Security numbers (meaning they will contribute but not collect). In fact,
illegal immigrants do not get federal welfare benefits of any kind. At the
same time they often pay income tax (through paycheck withholdings) and
sales tax, thereby helping directly or indirectly to underwrite
transportation, health care, education and other services.

And while immigrants surely have contributed to some extent to the
ranks of the poor, that was also true of previous waves of immigrants; the
point is, most of those immigrants didn't stay poor."

June 4, 2007 - Washington Post

....so illegals do not qualify for many of the 'social services' you say
they are draining. most would be too terrified of being deported to even
apply for them.

>>> As an aside, the
>>> number of illegals has been drastically declining over the past 18
>>> months due to the influence of state laws, increased ICE activity,
>>> and public backlash. The number of LEGAL migrants has been making up
>>> the deficit, and has increased in the agricultural industries.
>>> American citizens are more and more willing to become employed in
>>> the construction and other skilled manual trades, which has been
>>> pushing out illegals by the droves and even replacing the legals. A
>>> side effect of a tightened job market.
>>
>> i would also like to see a cite for that. how many american citizens
>> do you think are out there picking lettuce?
>
> Uh, how do you get picking lettuce out of my talking about skilled trades?

yes, i was careless in my reading of your post, there. my apologies.

> But as point of fact, all one needs to do is look at the increased number of
> ag employers applying for and utilizing the H2-A program because of the loss
> of the illegal market. In my area, which is the heaviest apple, pear, peach,
> apricot and cherry producing area in the nation, the only migrant laborers
> are those under the various temporary visa programs. 5 years ago, illegals
> made up a large proportion of the labor market. ICE is now a constant
> presence doing spot checks on documentation of both the laborer and the
> farmer.
>
> Illegal labor will continue to be a fact of life, but it is far less the
> norm than before. And as employers continue to face jail and are heavily
> fined (how the equivalent of year's worth of production?), illegal labor
> will become negligible as a part of the overall work force.

it's hard to tell how things will shake out. with so much money involved,
special interests will no doubt be disproportionately heard from.

in any case, rounding them all up and shipping them back to where they came
from isn't really an option (not saying that you favor this, just saying).

your pal,
blake